Cap and Trade

[jamie2112]

Not entirely. Most politicians are first and foremost wanting to improve our country. p.

Really????LOL you cannot be serious..I dont do these political threads but that statement just got me.I have to disagree whole heartedly on that. Most politicians are in it for themselves as we can all plainly see.This to me, is the kind of thinking that put us in this crappy situation.I cannot believe you really think that lyers and cheats have OUR best interest at heart.ALL of the politicians can pound salt IMO they are all liers and cheats and could care less what happens to our country as long as they are well off and can continue throwing our money away and making themselves more powerful. Thats really what all this crap is about POWER and who controls who......politics suck and I have said many times NOBODY wins in a political argument.......wake up know your ememy......

 

[Tomorrow]

Because your view asserts moral superiority I caution you against it.

Stones and glass houses----->

You may not like it, but you are part of this species so you have 2 choices. Get over it and get involved or continuing your doom and gloom. Personally I see no need to cry disaster with every election or bill passed in our nation.

 

[Nemo128]

Thanks, Nibhaz, and well said. It's all very 13th century, don't you think? Lords and fiefdoms to be protected. Taxes to be levied on the struggling commoners.

Here's a little quote from a source...not exactly a bastion of political conservatism...Parade magazine. Of course we all know about those honest, hard working, high morality, good intentioned politicians. (http://www.parade.com/news/intelligence-report/archive/090705-federal-employees-rack-up-big-bills.html) Just one little, tiny example of those who lead us......

Federal Employees Rack Up Big Bills
Ten years ago, Congress created a new system of government credit cards for federal employees booking work-related travel. The cards were meant to curb waste and abuse. But since their introduction, charges have doubled—from $4.39 billion in 1999 to $8.28 billion last year.

Among the expenses flagged in a new report from the Congressional Research Service: $3700 for laser eye surgery, $4100 for a first-class trip to Hawaii, and $100 million in unclaimed refunds for airline tickets that were purchased but never used.

“The Obama Administration came in promising to cut waste, and this is really the low-hanging fruit,” says Scott Amey, general counsel to the nonpartisan Project on Government Oversight.

Despite guidelines from the Office of Management and Budget, oversight of employee spending has been inconsistent at best. Now, Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) has introduced a bill that would require inspectors general in each agency to monitor the use of government credit cards more closely. Abusers could face criminal charges, be fired, or be required to reimburse the government for losses.

When he introduced the measure this spring, Grassley cited Congressional investigations that found that government travel cards had been used to pay for gambling, sporting events, concerts, cruises, and even gentlemen’s clubs and legalized brothels.

“Clearly, we still have a problem,” the Senator says.

— J. Scott Orr

I just have to throw this out there to stoke the fires...

Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for:

1. Strip clubs
2. Personal gas
3. Personal dinners
4. Personal shopping
5. Personal vacations
6. Paying off personal bills with transfers

they were all, without exception, conservative gun-loving welfare-hating borderline-or-fully-racist war-mongering lazy underworked overpaid large-pension-holding Republicans who spend more time drinking coffee and b*tching about "ghetto trash" than actually doing work. LET THE BATTLE ENSUE!!!

 

[lsiberian]

Stones and glass houses----->

I got strong glass.

 

[Tomorrow]

I got strong glass.

And apparently large stones.

 

[nibhaz]

Because your view asserts moral superiority I caution you against it.

I believe ignorance is a greater source of their struggles than Malice.

Well I suppose that I would accept the premise that their actions are not malicious per se.

But ignorance is a laughable excuse for their actions or lack thereof. A politician’s job is to know what the hell is going on and make informed and sound decisions, and at the federal level, this should be focused on the good of the country as a whole. But somewhere along the line things got seriously f’d up and the focus has become about money and power. As exemplified by the power wield by special interest groups and pork barrel spending.

Both sides are guilty as hell of losing sight of why they are actually in Washington, neither holds a moral high ground in my book, but there is a sliver of hope left in me that Republicans will start walking the walk of smaller government. I could care less about their social agenda…but I digress.

 

[nibhaz]

Some would argue that they are the epitomy of the belief in personal financial gain at the expense of any, the dog-eat-dog mentality that we're fed from birth. I don't agree with it, but it does happen. I myself was raised to believe I can trust no one and I have to be out for and look out for myself first and foremost.

I fell real far from that tree.

Yes, in a way I could see that they somehow personify a distorted version of the American dream.

I rarely step back to consider the socioeconomic factors that create the people that I pass judgment on from the Fortress of Solitude. But that line of thinking leads to compassion which confuses my mechanical, callous view of the world.

 

[adwilk]

I just have to throw this out there to stoke the fires...

Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for:

1. Strip clubs
2. Personal gas
3. Personal dinners
4. Personal shopping
5. Personal vacations
6. Paying off personal bills with transfers

they were all, without exception, conservative gun-loving welfare-hating borderline-or-fully-racist war-mongering lazy underworked overpaid large-pension-holding Republicans who spend more time drinking coffee and b*tching about "ghetto trash" than actually doing work. LET THE BATTLE ENSUE!!!

Without proof this is very offensive. Perhaps some credible evidence to back up your post would be helpful. Try this...

Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for:

1. Wife Beating
2. Same Sex Having (not that theres anything wrong with that)
3. Personal Shopping
4. Tax Dodging
5. Liberty Stealing

they were all, without exception, liberal, homo-loving, tree-hugging, wanna be freeloading- pass the buck- pu$$y democrats who spend more time protecting the very individuals who are ruining this country than looking out for those that made it and giving handouts to "ghetto trash" instead of making them work. Battle ensued.

 

[adwilk]

But that line of thinking leads to compassion which confuses my mechanical, callous view of the world.

If that statement is indeed true, its actually quite sad.

 

[Nemo128]

Without proof this is very offensive. Perhaps some credible evidence to back up your post would be helpful. Try this...

Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for:

1. Wife Beating
2. Same Sex Having (not that theres anything wrong with that)
3. Personal Shopping
4. Tax Dodging
5. Liberty Stealing

they were all, without exception, liberal, homo-loving, tree-hugging, wanna be freeloading- pass the buck- pu$$y democrats who spend more time protecting the very individuals who are ruining this country than looking out for those that made it and giving handouts to "ghetto trash" instead of making them work. Battle ensued.

I said every one I know of internally because that's where I work and who I work with. I'm sure there are examples to the contrary, but my statement stands exactly as is. Take it as offensive if you want, it's the truth. I know of not a single example otherwise here personally in my office/building/base.

My exact statement was "Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for (list of bad behavior)". I didn't say every person ever, because I don't know every person. I didn't say every govt employee, because I don't know every one. I said those I know of personally.

And I must know, since the matter at hand was the govt purchase card, how do you beat a wife with one of those? Or have gay sex with one? Or dodge taxes with one?

 

[adwilk]

I said everyone I know of internally because that's where I work and who I work with. I'm sure there are examples to the contrary, but my statement stands exactly as is. Take it as offensive if you want, it's the truth. I know of not a single example otherwise here personally in my office/building/base.

My exact statement was "Every person I know of internally that has ever done things like this and got caught for (list of bad behavior)". I didn't say every person ever, because I don't know every person. I didn't say every govt employee, because I don't know every one. I said those I know of personally.

I know I know... but I figured you if were gonna put the flame suit on that somebody should throw some fire. I'd hate for that to go to waste. I knew you didnt mean that "absolutely" as absolutely can mean. Rarely is something offensive if it doesnt contain some truth.

 

[Nemo128]

I know I know... but I figured you if were gonna put the flame suit on that somebody should throw some fire. I'd hate for that to go to waste. I knew you didnt mean that "absolutely" as absolutely can mean. Rarely is something offensive if it doesnt contain some truth.

Hey, I'm positively sure that there are "liberal, homo-loving, tree-hugging, wanna be freeloading- pass the buck- pu$$y democrats who spend more time protecting the very individuals who are ruining this country than looking out for those that made it and giving handouts to 'ghetto trash' instead of making them work" that have robbed the American people blind by misusing their charge card.

I just don't know any myself. And believe me, my best friend could be one of them and I'd report his @$$ to our IG.

Oh, back to the topic. I don't support the bill at all. My problem with criticism of the bill, or any bill, by the common citizen is when they criticize it without actually knowing what it is. Worse yet is the citizen who criticizes it based on the view of some politician they support or align with, yet they criticize all politicians and the system in general. Think about it, "They're all crooks and they can't be trusted!!!... oh, cept this guy, cuz he thinks like me." Come on! Draw your own conclusions 100%.

I am admittedly an aetheist, but I made it a point to study very deeply the scriptures of any religion pushed on me before I will criticize it. I won't tell someone their beliefs are stupid or wrong just because they don't coincide with mine. Nothing personal, but Tomorrow's OP referred to a politician and his thoughts on the bill. It took quite a few posts before I saw Tomorrow's thoughts on it, and that leads me to believe he had none of his own until he was challenged on them. That may not be the truth at all, and I'm sure he has his reasons. I simply wanted to know those reasons. They most likely reflect my own.

 

[Tomorrow]

I won't tell someone their beliefs are stupid or wrong just because they don't coincide with mine. Nothing personal, but Tomorrow's OP referred to a politician and his thoughts on the bill. It took quite a few posts before I saw Tomorrow's thoughts on it, and that leads me to believe he had none of his own until he was challenged on them. That may not be the truth at all, and I'm sure he has his reasons. I simply wanted to know those reasons. They most likely reflect my own.

I'm a self-admitted old and slow curmudgeon. What does the above say? ... or what do you really want to know? Frankly, Nemo, you're not making any sense. Based upon your first posts, I'd say the above is a bit of CYA hooey.

Either of you read all 1427 pages of the bill? Cuz I did, and I could have a lot of fun with this debate.

Thanks for answering the question posed...

I for one have no problem with $2k of my yearly money going towards trying to ensure our children a cleaner future with less reliance on foreign energy imports. I spend 5x more than that on dumb meaningless crap in a year anyway. Then again, I'm not all for "Hey future generations, we made the mess, now it's your problem!"

I stated my thoughts immediately while you wanted to show off your Evelyn Woods Speed Reading ability and have at debate. In your second post you contradict what you now say that we are probably in agreement. My post...what's not clear about my OP position?

This is the problem when you want to initiate programs you can't pay for. Apparently worse, this is just the tip of the iceberg. It's not the top 2% wage earners that get taxed. It's everyone. If this bill passes the U.S. Senate, you can all kiss a LOT of money goodbye...jobs too, and not just for and in the energy sector. But then perhaps this is how our Supreme Leader proposes to pay for all the cool things he wants the government to do.

 

[jamie2112]

And I must know, since the matter at hand was the govt purchase card, how do you beat a wife with one of those? Or have gay sex with one? Or dodge taxes with one?

Very very carefully................

 

[Matt34]

Oh, back to the topic. I don't support the bill at all. My problem with criticism of the bill, or any bill, by the common citizen is when they criticize it without actually knowing what it is. Worse yet is the citizen who criticizes it based on the view of some politician they support or align with, yet they criticize all politicians and the system in general. Think about it, "They're all crooks and they can't be trusted!!!... oh, cept this guy, cuz he thinks like me." Come on! Draw your own conclusions 100%.

Like Chris stated early on, it's absurd to try and pass a bill that is 1300+ pages long so quickly without debate or in depth research from our elected officials. Damn right I'm going to criticize it and the process without reading every page of it. I did read the "cliff notes" enough to understand the big picture.

 

[tbewick]

The above from K. Anderson is well stated but flawed in a way. One can be blind to that which is dear to him. I disagree that it is a matter of will. It's a matter of the implementation of "corrective" action.

I trust much to science, it is but a tool to exercise...not a truth. The climate prognostications are based upon historic data, computer modeling, and best guesses and approximations. No future 'proof' or truth exists. But that is all perhaps irrelevant. Let's just assume that the global warmists are correct. What then is relevant is the government involvement with science. It's frequently frought with unforeseen consequences. No science and certainly no unilateral political, non-examinated legislation can foresee the constellation of possible results of any global action. (Approval of DDT to improve crop performance is a small but perfect example.) It's the implementation of science that worries me, not the science...but apparently not Anderson.

Here's a simpler fix for you. Let's all just move to the temperate latitudes and make cattle extinct. (Free beef for everyone under the poverty level! AND...no one has to live in North Dakota. ) That should have a greater impact on our earthly carbon feetprints than anything as convoluted as this unaffordable legislation will end up with.

You say the Bill is unaffordable, but I think this is open to dispute (1). I accept that climate change mitigation could have unforeseen and potentially negative consequences. This has to be balanced against the potential benefits of acting. In my view, there is justification for mitigating the risks of climate change.

Potential impacts (2):

Change in risk between business-as-usual emissions and sharp emission reductions (3):

Business-as-usual (currently spinning)

Sharp emission reductions

(1) April 2009 - The United States Environmental Protection Agency's Preliminary Analysis of the Waxman-Markey Discussion Draft in the 111th Congress, The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/economics/economicanalyses.html
See also:
Pew Centre – 'Climate Policy Memo #2 – Eight Myths about the Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Bill'
http://www.pewclimate.org/acesa/eight-myths/June2009
(2) Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm
(3) MIT Global Change Program
http://globalchange.mit.edu/resources/gamble/spinning.html

 

[lsiberian]

You say the Bill is unaffordable, but I think this is open to dispute (1). I accept that climate change mitigation could have unforeseen and potentially negative consequences. This has to be balanced against the potential benefits of acting. In my view, there is justification for mitigating the risks of climate change.

Potential impacts (2):

Change in risk between business-as-usual emissions and sharp emission reductions (3):

Business-as-usual (currently spinning)

Sharp emission reductions

(1) April 2009 - The United States Environmental Protection Agency's Preliminary Analysis of the Waxman-Markey Discussion Draft in the 111th Congress, The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/economics/economicanalyses.html
See also:
Pew Centre – 'Climate Policy Memo #2 – Eight Myths about the Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Bill'
http://www.pewclimate.org/acesa/eight-myths/June2009
(2) Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm
(3) MIT Global Change Program
http://globalchange.mit.edu/resources/gamble/spinning.html

Well let's take it a little slow with these doom and gloom scenarios too.

Honestly I think this bill is a joke since it has not real effect until 2020. By then they will elect a republican that will reverse it. Or maybe we'll be at war with another super power.

 

[bandphan]

Global warming So what do we do when the next volcano errupts in japan, italy, the orient or where ever, hows the bill gonna help then Global warming has it opponents and proponents, im for one in the group that the Earth will goes thru natural cycles of cooling and heating, and no member of congress can tell me otherwise. If I have to hear reverend lovejoy errrrr al gore one more time im gonna puke. JMO and btw it was damm cold this winter here in south florida, hit 38 one night burrrrrr.

 

[Tomorrow]

Honestly I think this bill is a joke....

Now you're talkin'!

 

[Matt34]

Global warming So what do we do when the next volcano errupts in japan, italy, the orient or where ever, hows the bill gonna help then Global warming has it opponents and proponents, im for one in the group that the Earth will goes thru natural cycles of cooling and heating, and no member of congress can tell me otherwise. If I have to hear reverend lovejoy errrrr al gore one more time im gonna puke. JMO and btw it was damm cold this winter here in south florida, hit 38 one night burrrrrr.

Isn't amazing the biggest proponent for all this global warming legislation has the most to gain from it through his business???

http://www.generationim.com/

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=475461

Global Warming: At the cap-and-trade hearings, it was revealed that not everyone will suffer from this growth-killing energy tax. A congresswoman wanted to know why sea levels aren't rising but Gore's bank account is.

When Gore left office in January 2001, he was said to have a net worth in the neighborhood of $2 million. A mere eight years later, estimates are that he is now worth about $100 million. It seems it's easy being green, at least for some.

Gore has his lectures and speeches, his books, a hit movie and Oscar, and a Nobel Prize. But Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., was curious about how a man dedicated to saving the planet could get so wealthy so quickly. She sought out investment advice we all could use in a shaky economy.

Last May, we noted that Big Al had joined the venture capital group Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers the previous September. On May 1, 2008, the firm announced a $500 million investment in maturing green technology firms called the Green Growth Fund.

Last Friday, Gore was the star witness at the hearings on cap-and- trade legislation before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Blackburn asked Gore about Kleiner-Perkins, noting that at last count they "have invested about a billion dollars invested in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation that we are discussing here today."

Blackburn then asked the $100 million question: "Is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?" Gore gave the stock answer that "the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge."

Last May, we also noted that on March 1, Gore, while speaking at a conference in Monterey, Calif., admitted to having "a stake" in a number of green investments that he recommended attendees put money in rather than "subprime carbon assets" such as tar sands and shale oil.

He also is co-founder of Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offsets that allow rich polluters to continue with a clear conscience. It's a scheme that will make traders of this new commodity rich and Bernie Madoff look like a pickpocket. The other founder is former Goldman Sachs partner David Blood.